Anthropologist - Action+1 card+1 actionChoose one: Choose a card in play and put it on your Research mat; or, play a card from your Research mat.

Puzzle: How many +1 Cards +1Actions can I get out of King's Courting this?

+3 and +3; however to determine the full effect of this, I need to know what you've also played, what you already have on your Research mat, and also determine the ruling of whether or not you can target a card that is in play but has not fully resolved, i.e. whether you can put the King's Court that you are playing the triple-Anthropologist with onto the Research mat in order to get literally infinite plays.

Anthropologist - Action+1 card+1 actionChoose one: Choose a card in play and put it on your Research mat; or, play a card from your Research mat.

Puzzle: How many +1 Cards +1Actions can I get out of King's Courting this?

+3 and +3; however to determine the full effect of this, I need to know what you've also played, what you already have on your Research mat, and also determine the ruling of whether or not you can target a card that is in play but has not fully resolved, i.e. whether you can put the King's Court that you are playing the triple-Anthropologist with onto the Research mat in order to get literally infinite plays.

+3 for both is an option, but not the maximum. I can also put Anthropologist itself on the mat (as yes, nothing in the current wording keeps me from doing that) and when I play it the second time, put the King's Court there, then on the third time choose Antropologist itself to play it once more, playing King's Court again, which leaves me with +4 Cards, +4 Actions and the option to King's Court one of the drawn cards.It's not infinite either, as King's Court only targets cards in your hand.

Anthropologist - Reaction - Action $3Play a card from your Research Mat-On your turn, when you play an Action card, you may discard this card from your hand. If you do, put an Action card from play onto your Research Mat.

I think this suppresses most of the weird behaviors, since for example a King's Court would simply put three cards from your Research Mat into play.

Anthropologist - Reaction - Action $3Play a card from your Research Mat-On your turn, when you play an Action card, you may discard this card from your hand. If you do, put an Action card from play onto your Research Mat.

I think this suppresses most of the weird behaviors, since for example a King's Court would simply put three cards from your Research Mat into play.

Well this is more in keeping with your set mechanics. As it is, I find it a little unclear how this is supposed to work. Suppose I only have one Action and one of these in hand. I play the Action then react with this. Do I resolve the Action before I move it to the mat? If I do, I would expect something like the wording from Royal Carriage and Coin of the Realm: 'directly after resolving an action, you may discard this...'

Assuming this is how it works, it is in essence Throne Room split into two cards. There would need to be 2 of these in hand during a turn to actually Throne something, and so because that means there's an extra card to buy and line up, this seems rather weak. You can of course replay an Action on a later turn, but by the time that later turn comes you likely have reshuffled your deck, so that it doesn't actually Throne the Action at all; you've only played it once each run-through of the deck.

So I feel this would be too weak to go with like this. I don't think there would be any technical problem adding some kind of bonus to the replays on this version; it wouldn't have to be +1 card +1 action, but that seems about right for balance.

I previously had it at +1 Card +1 Action and it was clearly too strong (at that point, it actually turns into something like a Village that spends its own first Action to play itself, and has the ability to marshal around other cards, all for $3.)

Stoneworks - $4 - Action+1 Buy. Trash a card from your hand to gain a Silver to your hand. Also, if it was a Victory card, for each $3 it cost, gain 2VP and a Gold.-After you gain this, +1 VP whenever you gain a card until the end of your turn.

Stoneworks - $4 - Action+1 Buy. Trash a card from your hand to gain a Silver to your hand. Also, if it was a Victory card, for each $3 it cost, gain 2VP and a Gold.-After you gain this, +1 VP whenever you gain a card until the end of your turn.

I think that

Quote

+1 BuyTrash a card from your hand to gain a Silver to your hand.

can already compete with Trading Post, a 5$ (which trashes more cards, but also depends on trashing two and adds no buy).Also, I think that translating 3$ to 2 VP and a Gold is really, really good payoff and probably makes a Duchy tfb strategy feasible on certain boards.The last part is just icing on the cake. If I gain one of these during my Action phase, it can go nuts, especially with its own Silver/Gold gaining and +Buy.

1) Trader. Trader costs $4, and gives many Silvers on trash. That said, it won't give Silvers for Coppers + Curses, and you could (successfully) argue that getting Silvers all the time is a bad thing... nobody will trash a Province for 8 silvers unless they are playing Feodum, and even then. The difference in cost somewhat hinges on the difference between gain many (probably too many) Silvers to your deck vs. gaining one to your hand (Trading Post.)

2) Goons. Goons rightfully costs $6, and gives a lot of things. You could argue that removing the attack portion of Goons and nerfing its money down to $1 would make a card that is similar to goons but costs $3 or $4. So...

Quote

Nerfed Stoneworks -- Action -- $4+1 Buy, +$1. When you buy a card when this is in play, gain +1VP.

I still think that this would be more cool as an on-gain effect, which is less powerful than an on-play, but if I also make it trigger on gains, then it is pretty damn powerful.

If I only make it trigger on buys, then it is weaker, but that would open up more design space... decisions.

I can trade the +$1 for a 'gain a silver' if I trash first, but only if I gain it to the discard pile, else we're in the $6-7 cost territory again.

Quote

Nerfedish Stoneworks -- Action -- $4+1 Buy. Trash a card from your hand to gain a Silver.-After you gain this card, get +1VP for each card you buy until the end of your turn.

This is closer to what I want, but still has two challenges: 1) you can turn Coppers and Curses into Silver. This is like the Trader, but with no reaction. It also doesn't do something when you trash Victory cards, which is pretty much something I was hoping to do to give it later-game longevity. So what about the following:

Quote

Longlasting Balanced? Stoneworks -- Action -- $4+1 Buy. Trash a card from your hand to gain a Treasure costing less than it.-After you gain this card, get +1VP for each card you buy until the end of your turn.

Now, this turns Coppers and Curses into nothing, but turns Estates into Coppers. Alternatively, in the late-game, this can turn the Actions you no longer want into Silvers or even Golds.The negative side is that I've basically lost all reason for you to trash a Duchy or Province. For this reason, I am proposing:

Quote

Proposed possibly moderately OP Stoneworks -- Action --$4+1 Buy. Trash a card from your hand to gain a Treasure costing less than it. If you trashed a Victory card, get +1VP for each card you buy until the end of your turn.-After you gain this card, get +1VP for each card you buy until the end of your turn.

I trust that I will test this, love it, and then realize it's too much text to put on one card.

What is your feedback, especially on cost? Which version feels most like $4?

Stoneworks -- Action -- $4+1 Buy.Trash a card from your hand to gain a Silver and put it on your deck. If you trashed a Victory card, get % per $ it cost more than $2.-After you gain this, % whenever you gain a card until the end of this turn.

An update: I'm currently working on the ruleset, and on a Python-based randomizer app that supports all of the new cards plus all of the official sets, plus supports proxying cards if you don't have a printout.

I'm hoping to make the randomizer app intuitive enough to modify so that you all can use it for your own customs.

I think the current wording of Artifact gives you infinite coins if you buy Venture with an empty deck:

Buy Venture.Discard Artifact.Play Venture.Dig for and play Artifact.Set up on-buy effect.You're still in the middle of the execution of an on-buy effect, so it's still "When you buy".Discard Artifact again.Play Venture (which is in play) again.Dig for and play Artifact again.You're still still in the middle of resolving an on-buy effect, so on-buy hasn't ended.And so on.

If you don't think that's right, consider the fact that you can play a Caravan Guard you drew with another Caravan Guard. It's not all that different. Lose-track also does not apply on playing things, as Throne Room/one-shots tells us.

navical, I could make that change, but I'd like to continue to support things like multiple Artifacts allowing multiple plays and buys. Although in that case I could just use the phrase "the next time you buy..."

Monolith (5)Action - Reaction - Attack+2 CardsYou may trash two differently named cards from your hand. If you do, +1 VP per $3 of their combined cost.-When you discard this card on another player's turn, you can reveal it. If you do, each other player gains a Curse.

Most of the time the reaction will trigger on an opponent's attack, and it isn't good to attack attacks as people will always be afraid to play them, Donald's thoughts not mine.

Quote

Artifact (4)Treasure$1Immediately after you buy a Treasure card, you may discard this from play. If you do, play that card and get +1 Buy.

'the next time you buy a treasure' should work.

Quote

Mendicant (4)Action+1VP tokenGain a Copper to your hand.The next time you buy a Victory card this turn, put a Copper in play onto a Kingdom Supply pile.(Players can't gain cards from that pile until they buy the Copper card.)

Edited: multiple plays of this could see several coppers go onto supply piles at once. In games without +buys players will simply have to get these to reveal piles they need, if you don't put a Copper on them before they do, that is. The VP token makes this card even more automatic in such a game. Change the payload for one thing, maybe to + $1, and somehow make the Coppers moving to other piles much less frequent so they aren't game breaking. (In my experience, making a good variant of a cards-on-other-supply-piles kingdom Action card is almost impossible).

Quote

Shipwreck (2)Action+1 Buy+$1When you discard this during your next Clean-Up, put a card from your discard pile that costs $0 on the bottom of your deck.

I don't see why this couldn't bottom-deck any Treasure, seeing how Herbalist works. I get the flavour, sunken treasure rises up the deck, synergy with Pearl Diver.Edit: Maybe you're anticipating this working with Heirlooms? (Bridges stop working at Clean-up, except for those with trolls under them and Ferry, most of the time only Copper and Curse could be bottom-decked, which is rather weak).

Quote

Boulder Trap (3)Trap -1 VPWhen you discard this card on another player's turn, that player gains this.-When you trash this, each other player gains a Curse.

Players are allowed to look through the Supply piles to count how many cards are left, or to read each Castle. They wouldn't have the surprise factor of traps.

Aquila, thanks for your reply and kind words!First off, this forum thread has been the crucible in which Antiquity was refined. I owe a lot to the community here, for teaching me to make a set that wasn't actually good or fun into something enjoyable. I may seem stubborn and I don't always work your feedback into a card, but I definitely take it all in, and I am full of thanksgiving.

Monolith - I actually feel like this is one of the weakest remaining cards, and it's the on-discard ability that seems to be the culprit. Perhaps I should swap out the reaction for something more unique and 2001 a space odyssey.

Mendicant - This card has been a pain, it's also very very new in its current form. It originally gained Silvers and sealed decks with those, but that had the adverse affect of accelerating the early game economy while getting you VPs. On the other hand, Aquila, the Coppers can only go on Kingdom piles (non-basic piles) so they won't stack on top of Provinces. Also, the idea is that putting a Copper on top of, say, a Mendicant pile turns that from a Mendicant (Kingdom) pile to a temporary Copper (basic) pile, so you can't have more than one on top of a pile at a time. I need to make that more clear.

That said, I'm thinking of making the payload something like "Gain an Estate." And I reaaaaallly need to playtest it more.

Shipwreck - The reason why I am bottom-decking only garbage is to give a drawback to prevent this card from being OP. But now I see Herbalist is a thing and isn't OP... Perhaps I should buff this up to +$2 and a Buy. Or perhaps I should make it a version of Herbalist that bottom-decks instead of top-decks but can choose any Treasure card from your discard pile.

Also, good point about Heirlooms. Maybe I should wait a bit and try to ensure that this works really good with Heirlooms.

Boulder Trap - Good point on the rules of being able to look through piles. I'm going to disagree, though -- my playtesters love playing with the Boulder Trap. They like the gotcha moments. It sounds like I need to make sure that I specify in Trap rules that in games with Traps, you can no longer look through piles. I should also clarify that currently you do not put traps in basic piles, and you don't put traps in any piles where order matters -- i.e., Castles or Split piles. I used to put the Trap directly in the middle of those piles, but that just made people not want to buy the card they knew was there.

Anyhow, thanks for your response -- I really value each one. Watch this spot for Mendicant 9.0 and Monolith 3.0

When I have two Artifacts in play and buy an Artifact, do I get to play it twice? If I buy another Artifact after that, do I get to play that twice, too? The current wording prohibits this, but neither a "first" nor "next" time wording would.

Asper, my intention is that you can only activate one Artifact per treasure buy.

Funny thing is, I'm pretty sure I can get almost the same behavior if I changed Artifact to say "Treasures cost $1 less, but not less than $0. The next time you Buy a Treasure this turn, +1 Buy"... Which would be a lot easier to understand and possibly have less room for confusion.Edit: No, no I wouldn't. I shouldn't make design choices first thing in the morning.

Digsite - Action + Victory - $8Reveal the top 5 cards of your deck.You may trash this. If you do, for each card you revealed...If it is an Action, Copper, or Silver card, +1VP.If it is another Treasure card, +2VP.

This gives the player more control over what the card is worth, but makes it a risk-reward choice. Do you buy Province for 6 guaranteed points, or Digsite for maybe $10 -- but not likely.Yes, I am aware of the insanity of comboing it with Crown.